FORMULA 1 ROLEX MAGYAR NAGYDÍJ 2018Formula 1 

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 222 comments
  • 11,388 views
181
Canada
Canada
Oswal07
Dear Lord, no.

LewisHamilton.jpg

I mean, that's hideous.

Props for rocking this, though:
25aaaaaa_1506239094.jpg

Grunge meet Gaultier. Designed for maximum groaning irony.
And thats fashion week he's attending.
 

TenEightyOne

I'm Slow, But I'm Wide!
Premium
20,678
TenEightyOne
TenEightyOne
See attached file, no image options for some reason.
 

Attachments

  • SchumacherOutifts.jpg
    49.8 KB · Views: 21
407
Saudi Arabia
Hofuf
Fishylocked
Can we please discuss the fact that a lapped car was shown the blue flag "9 TIMES" before letting the leader pass with the FIA not even investigating this offense? I think this has rubbed us a thrilling fight for the win more than anything . I also think that the FIA appears to be more lean on giving penalties to Merc compared to Ferrari!
 
6,063
Palestine
Palestine
BALD_GYE
Can we please discuss the fact that a lapped car was shown the blue flag "9 TIMES" before letting the leader pass with the FIA not even investigating this offense? I think this has rubbed us a thrilling fight for the win more than anything . I also think that the FIA appears to be more lean on giving penalties to Merc compared to Ferrari!
One thing I think that is interesting about the race, was that Sainz. Ant picked up on the fact that Sainz was given some 9 blue flags before he let Vettel past... that added up to over a second and could have allowed him to jump Bottas and go after the win.

But no stewards enquiry...
 

adb

534
Poland
Poland
Who said they can’t?
Should opinions go unchallenged on a forum?
Yes
:lol:
But really if you said “what don’t you like about his outfit” that would be challenging an opinion, saying what you did say, it sounds more like “hurr durr LEAVE HIM ALONE!!!!1!!!1”
 
2,901
Jamaica
Kingston, Jamaica
pj-gm
PJwasHere876
F1 drivers in the past were the coolest guys around, not only for their skill. I think lately Hamilton stands out because we are used to the modern F1 driver who is more of a humble athlete and otherwise isn't much more interesting than a bowl of corn flakes. It's good for the sport that the best drivers are also superstars, who are household names and familiar faces like the best athletes in other sports.

The old era where F1 was for the middle aged who would watch Sunday's race while smoking a few fags and read his F1 gossip on the back page of his Herald is over. This is a social media dominant age, and drivers should think about having a bigger public image if they want the sport they love to survive. Hamilton gets cross examined almost in the same way Raheem Sterling does for England. It's not fair, nor is it relevant to what he does on the actual job.
 

Touring Mars

Pie variant
Moderator
24,769
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
GTP_Mars
This is a social media dominant age, and drivers should think about having a bigger public image if they want the sport they love to survive.

Hamilton gets cross examined almost in the same way Raheem Sterling does for England. It's not fair, nor is it relevant to what he does on the actual job.

These two comments seem at odds with each other somewhat - I agree that athletes should engage with the public as much as they can, and social media allows them to do that so much more easily than it has ever been before. I'd agree to a certain extent that some 'cross examination' (or criticism) is unfair, but they can't have it both ways - don't forget that these guys not only get paid millions for their sporting prowess, but are also paid millions to appear on social media (and elsewhere) wearing certain clothes, to be seen in certain locations with certain people, and even to say certain things. At least LH has the good sense to avoid courting controversy outside of his sport - sporting controversy is (mostly) good, personal controversy is almost universally bad. Either way, athletes such as LH don't have much of a choice as to whether they engage on social media lest they wish to throw away millions in lucrative endorsement deals, and as such they need to be able to take the rough with the smooth. LH strikes a pretty good balance, though at the end of the day, I doubt that he gives much of a damn what people say about him when he is well on his way to being a billionaire.
 
2,901
Jamaica
Kingston, Jamaica
pj-gm
PJwasHere876
These two comments seem at odds with each other somewhat - I agree that athletes should engage with the public as much as they can, and social media allows them to do that so much more easily than it has ever been before. I'd agree to a certain extent that some 'cross examination' (or criticism) is unfair, but they can't have it both ways - don't forget that these guys not only get paid millions for their sporting prowess, but are also paid millions to appear on social media (and elsewhere) wearing certain clothes, to be seen in certain locations with certain people, and even to say certain things. At least LH has the good sense to avoid courting controversy outside of his sport - sporting controversy is (mostly) good, personal controversy is almost universally bad. Either way, athletes such as LH don't have much of a choice as to whether they engage on social media lest they wish to throw away millions in lucrative endorsement deals, and as such they need to be able to take the rough with the smooth. LH strikes a pretty good balance, though at the end of the day, I doubt that he gives much of a damn what people say about him when he is well on his way to being a billionaire.

I was just trying to say his willingness to emulate the super-stardom of other top level athletes should not be criticized the way it is. Like you said, his personal controversy is actually at a minimum compared to other athletes, yet he is getting cross examined about his hair, clothes, partying lifestyle, despite still being a serial winner in his sport. I brought up the Sterling example as a similar case, of where an athlete is constantly put in a negative light for things others do without critique. That said, one is probably a bit more racially charged than the other, while one is more of a case of critics looking for ammunition.